Imagine you are watching a film about, let' us say Gaugin. There he is on a warm, sunny island in the Pacific painting away. Then, suddenly they appear- rude, crude characters from BENNY HILL . Overacting, preening, screaming, making suggestive sexual innuendo! Then we go back to our painter, who is now painting a nude Helen Mirren.

repeat cycle

finally we come to the end of our saga as some lame crooner belches out the horrid song "Age of consent"

even Marty scorcese probably holds his nose when he watches this stinker b

This is the conventional wisdom about this film (Leonard Maltin gives it one and a half stars in his latest movie guide edition), but I disagree that TTW is a wash-out. I found that it had some haunting meditations on marriage and faith, and I plan to revisit it often.

Nevertheless - its dreamy, poetic style that worked so perfectly in THE TREE OF LIFE doesn't work so well for TTW. Perhaps if it had been made and released before TREE it would have made more sense as the themes of TREE are grander than TTW's.

TREE is hard to top. (no pun intended.) I love it, I think it's one of the greatest films ever. But, unless Malick's next few films are grander in scale than it, I would prefer he go back to his BADLANDS style for more down-to-earth subjects.

TERENCE FISCHER did some excellent genre films like HORROR OF DRACULA, HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES, THE MUMMY , THE DEVIL'S BRIDE ETC ETC but he didn't like SCIFI much and it showed in two run of the mill efforts ISLAND OF TERROR AND ISLAND OF THE BURNING DAMMED.

I agree that War of the Worlds was really disappointing. Not just the story, but the whole look of the picture was like some post processed desaturated VHS tape looking thing. The effects were good, for what they are, but the presentation really was not good. And the story itself is so unrelentingly downbeat and depressing. There is little saving grace to the story and the characters. Even the kids are downbeat and negative, which is not common for Spielberg. It is a very unpleasant film experience.

I agree that War of the Worlds was really disappointing. Not just the story, but the whole look of the picture was like some post processed desaturated VHS tape looking thing. The effects were good, for what they are, but the presentation really was not good. And the story itself is so unrelentingly downbeat and depressing. There is little saving grace to the story and the characters. Even the kids are downbeat and negative, which is not common for Spielberg. It is a very unpleasant film experience.

I agree that War of the Worlds was really disappointing. Not just the story, but the whole look of the picture was like some post processed desaturated VHS tape looking thing. The effects were good, for what they are, but the presentation really was not good. And the story itself is so unrelentingly downbeat and depressing. There is little saving grace to the story and the characters. Even the kids are downbeat and negative, which is not common for Spielberg. It is a very unpleasant film experience.

It is not one of the worst of the decade, or the year either, but it sure is not one of the best of the year or the decade. I will file it, as made, under the unnecessary remake category. It is way down the list of the Spielberg filmography for me.

(It is better than Indy 4 though, although that was also a desaturated - camera lens smeared with petroleum jelly picture. Remarkably ugly and filled with bad effects for such an expensive A list picture.)

its bizarre really, how many "fans" trash both INDY4 & WOTW. they must have had very unhappy childhoods bruce

Well, it is pretty simple, these are dreadfully made films, in the case of Indy 4, it pales in comparison to Indy 3 and Indy 1. Indy 2 had script issues and was really way too dark, at least it looks good and does not bog down in narrative drivel. Indy 4 just plane looks bad, and it is mired in narrative hooky pokey from Lucas.

If I liked Indy 4 after the legacy of pictures so enormously superior I think it would indicate that my childhood was not happy, not the reverse they way you are suggesting. At least my childhood enabled me to know when a picture is crap plying on my nostalgia, standing on the legacy of something better.

TO Manderley- I agree with you 100%, all the talent in the film industry yet all the insults, but let's put the blame where the blame lies, mainstream critics, they lead the way to such attitudes, always have, Rex Reed and the like, if it does not smell good to them it stinks, can't or couldn't they say i just don't like the film, it just does not attract my taste buds, no they can't do that can they, this board is cool, good stuff, but we have problems like that on this board, it's everywhere in life, but all the blood , sweat and tears that artists put into their craft,to see it torn asunder is a pitiful thing, Why we are hear now, film composers have often got the worst of it.

Mainstream critics are not the problem. It's when the writing doesn't involve specifics as to why a film doesn't work, or even better, how it could have been made better. If there were no critique, well jeez... your issues are towards the tone.

TO Manderley- I agree with you 100%, all the talent in the film industry yet all the insults, but let's put the blame where the blame lies, mainstream critics, they lead the way to such attitudes, always have, Rex Reed and the like, if it does not smell good to them it stinks, can't or couldn't they say i just don't like the film, it just does not attract my taste buds, no they can't do that can they, this board is cool, good stuff, but we have problems like that on this board, it's everywhere in life, but all the blood , sweat and tears that artists put into their craft,to see it torn asunder is a pitiful thing, Why we are hear now, film composers have often got the worst of it.

Mainstream critics are not the problem. It's when the writing doesn't involve specifics as to why a film doesn't work, or even better, how it could have been made better. If there were no critique, well jeez... your issues are towards the tone.

I more often disagree with a critic saying something is good then when they say it is bad. I especially disagree when they are over the moon for something like The Avengers. I stand back, and I go huh?